[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Re: maps

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: maps
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 08:04:35 -0400
• In-reply-to: <E840F0B7E6189547BDB91DA8BF2228AB28C671@c...>

At 09:34 PM 8/4/2002 -0700, Micah Dubinko wrote:
>An unpopular (but possible with current technology) answer is that the ° and
>' and " and even N|S|E|W stuff is window dressing, and that the actual value
>is just a number:
>
><zoo>
>   <name>Utica Zoo</name>
>   <lat>75.25</lat>
>   <long>43.08333333333333</long>
></zoo>

No, that's not an acceptable answer.  Part of the reason for using XML at 
all is the possibility and even probability that humans will be playing 
with these files directly and/or writing software, and preserving the 
idioms they use is critical.

Reductionism may be wonderful for computers, but it's not very useful for 
the rest of us. At least in theory, XML is supposed to provide a middle 
ground between human and machine-readable.


Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: maps
    • From: Bob Hutchison <hutch@x...>
  • RE: Re: maps
    • From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@n...>
  • Re: Re: maps
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• References:
  • RE: Re: maps
    • From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: browsers that support XSL
• Next by Date: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: maps
• Next by thread: Re: Re: maps
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread